Hatrack River Writers Workshop: Break through the barriers

This is topic Break through the barriers in forum Open Discussions About Writing at Hatrack River Writers Workshop.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.hatrack.com/ubb/writers/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=002131

Posted by Ratlance (Member # 1893) on :

We'll I've been thinking lately on how you would go about in creating a new form of writing a story. Like beyond what all the other writers are doing, but somthing new to really make the reader feel and hear, and be captured by the characters. I know it probaly doesn't make any sense, but I'm just trying to look beyond the box, because it seems so many writers today find themselves stuck in the box of how to write correctly. We somtimes tend to forget writing is a art form, and art has no barriers, for it is the most pure sense of freedom. To get get back on subject I'm just wondering if anyone else has tought of this, and what are their ideas on this?

Posted by djvdakota (Member # 2002) on :

My thoughts on the issue are that I'm not even going to think about doing something so daring until I'm proficient at the craft.

Art follows craft.

Picasso studied the craft of art before he paved his own road in the art world.

I am FAR from being proficient enough at the craft to consider trying to make that kind of groundbreaking leap.

Posted by Ratlance (Member # 1893) on :

But how proficent is proficent? Writing is a never-ending learning process; there is always somthing more to learn, so when do you stop and take matters into your own hands?

I also find that it is good to study the craft of writing to build a strong foundation, but don't lose your own style of writing in the process.
Don't get me wrong though I do study peoples writing from their stories, but I don't belive in reading writers refrence. I feel writers refrence is telling you how to write, and putting barriers on your imgination. The only thing I feel good about learning from is grammer books, because my grammer is not too good.

These are just my ideas though, and I'm just trying to see what people think of this subject.

Posted by tchernabyelo (Member # 2651) on :

I generally adhere to the principle that it's OK to break the rules, so long as you know exactly what rule you're breaking and why you're doing it (I generally use this to explain why I've adopted some particular grammatical quirk, but it's basically a subset of what djvdakota is saying).

If something's never been done before, there are a number of possible reasons. Maybe no-one's ever thought of it before. But maybe people have and it's not a very good idea

I have one piece that I started work on years ago and has been sitting in a corner, because it's written in the future tense, and therefore although it starts at one point it actually branches out in different possible directions. It's a very interesting idea but there's every chance it will (should I ever get more than a few hundred words in!) become utterly unworkable. I did it quite consciously and deliberately, because it's a vampire story, and there are SO many vampire stories that I figured I needed to find a completely different way of telling one. So it actually begins with the lead character being turned into a vampire, and then starts to go off in the various directions of what might happen as a result.

I reckon it has an extremely good chance of never seeing the light of do, though to be honest as hyperfiction, where you can link along the path you-the-reader think you're most comfortable with, it might have a faint chance of working. But it probably means writing the equivalent of several novels just to get a novella-length reading experience out of it. May not be worth the bother...

Posted by EricJamesStone (Member # 1681) on :

If the purpose of one's art is solely to "express oneself," regardless of whether such expression is meaningful to others, then one's art can be free of all rules or barriers.

However, if one's art is meant to communicate something, then there are rules that help make that communication meaningful.

Let's take poetry as an example.

The most restrictive forms of poetry are bound by rules regarding rhyme, meter, syllable and line counts, etc. As one loosens those rules, one's poetry becomes more "free." But when one is no longer bound at all by rhyme, meter, or any other conventions about what poetry is supposed to be like, is one even writing what anyone would recognize as poetry any more?

Similarly, once one completely exits the "box" of storywriting, is one even writing a story?

Posted by Ratlance (Member # 1893) on :

Ya I get exactly what both of you mean, and I'm not talking about totaly changing the form of writing, but enhancing it. Like in filming for instance, different directors use different ways of filming for you to be emotionaly caught in the movie scenes, and the matrix is a great example of using filming as way to get this across.

I just want to find a way to enhance the way of storytelling, to were it triggers all the readers emotions and grabs his/hers imgination beyond anything before. Maybe using different character perspectives; or mixing them together.

I defiantly like your view eric, and the idea of exiting the box. I do believe this box is meant to be expanded, but I can't see how you can ever leave it.

Totaly off subject but I feel poetry and storytelling are one of the same, for you must have poetry in a story, and you have to have storytelling. But this is a very thin line.

Posted by franc li (Member # 3850) on :

What was your purpose in not formatting the title of The Matrix? Do you really agree "defiantly"?

I'm all for new forms, as long as they include paragraph breaks at reasonable intervals. (Which you don't have a problem with, but I'm just saying that it bothers me when people don't use paragraph breaks to depict stream of consciousness.)

[This message has been edited by franc li (edited June 16, 2005).]

Posted by Spaceman (Member # 9240) on :

I say, be bold and experiment with your writing. You might even learn something. On the other hand, if you want to publish you experiments--I'm not going to say you need to learn your craft first, I'll say you probably need to be established first.

Posted by Survivor (Member # 213) on :

The...we aren't limited to just being writers anymore, you know.

The story "box" has been left by plenty of writers...who are no longer writing stories, and in many cases are no longer really "writers" as such, though they certainly still write. It is true that most of the divergences from writing a story in the conventional sense were made millenia ago, but there have been some recent offshoots enabled by technology. Hypertext has beem mentioned...I would include fully interactive computer RPGs and even narrative action games, which have also been discussed on this forum.

But I think that you're suffering from a delusion if you think that there's a "barrier" for you to "break through" here. There is no barrier. People are already doing all kinds of writing that falls outside the definition of being "stories".

Okay, well, there's the barrier of money, I suppose....

Posted by Spaceman (Member # 9240) on :

quote:
...there's the barrier of money...

But that's not writing, that's publishing, and that kind of publishing is frowned upon.

[This message has been edited by Spaceman (edited June 17, 2005).]

Posted by Survivor (Member # 213) on :

Just to be clear, somebody has to pay to have your work published (even in the samizdat system, redistributing the costs doesn't make them go away).

But yes, the money barrier doesn't keep you from writing. It just keeps you from getting paid

Posted by Ratlance (Member # 1893) on :

I find you have a very good point Survivor, I think it's just recoginizing everyone is bound to write different, and in doing so create there own style and a new form of writing.

Posted by Blue_Rabbit (Member # 2634) on :

First publish something renown (or at least salable), then experiment. Publishers don't take anything courageous until the author has a "name".
Unless, of course, you are lucky to be a protege of a famous author.

But then again, if you write something only to be salable, you can't write something you really want to. Stories like that won't be powerful.

So write what you want, sooner or later you'll hit the market

[This message has been edited by Blue_Rabbit (edited June 21, 2005).]

Posted by Pyre Dynasty (Member # 1947) on :

Giant floating billboards! That is a way to present a story that hasn't been done before.

Posted by Survivor (Member # 213) on :

No, it isn't.

Posted by Pyre Dynasty (Member # 1947) on :

Doh! I forgot about the goodyear blimp.

Posted by kkmmaacc (Member # 2643) on :

I just bought "Year's Best SF 10" and in the introduction, came upon the following passage:

quote:

It is our opinion that it is a good thing to have genre boundaries. If we didn't, young writers would have to find something else to transgress to draw attention to themselves.

So, what is the most likely implication here: If you transgress boundaries, you will draw attention to yourself, or if you transgress boundaries you will mark yourself as a newbie? Or, more likely, both at the same time?

-K.

[This message has been edited by kkmmaacc (edited June 25, 2005).]

Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :

I think it's that if you transgress a writing practice (whether it be boundaries or some other convention) in order to draw attention to yourself (and for no other reason), you show yourself to be immature.